Archive · 24 Sep 2026
Bombay HC Sets Aside DNA Test Order In Paternity Dispute
A man said he was the biological son of a deceased person and wanted part of the person’s property.
The deceased person’s wife and three children disagreed.
The man asked the court to order a DNA test before presenting other evidence.
The Bombay High Court said courts should not order DNA tests automatically whenever someone disputes parentage.
First, the claimant must show evidence supporting the alleged relationship.
The court must then decide whether existing evidence is enough.
If the case still cannot be decided, a DNA test may later be considered.
The High Court therefore cancelled the earlier DNA-test order but allowed the man to apply again after evidence is completed.
The Bombay High Court set aside a 2018 order directing a DNA test in a disputed paternity case.
Justice Sandeep Marne said parties must first present evidence supporting their claims before seeking scientific testing.
The claimant, identified as A, sought a one-fifth share of the late B’s properties as his alleged son.
The court said a DNA test should not be ordered routinely based only on an assertion and denial.
The claimant may request a fresh DNA test after evidence is completed if the dispute cannot otherwise be decided.
- Who
- The Bombay High Court, Justice Sandeep Marne, and a claimant identified as A in a paternity and property dispute.
- What
- The court set aside an order requiring DNA testing before the parties had presented evidence.
- When
- The High Court ruling was reported on September 23, 2026; the challenged lower-court order was from 2018.
- Where
- The matter involved a Nashik civil court and the Bombay High Court.
- Why
- The court held that DNA testing should not be routine and should be considered only after evidence is presented and found insufficient.
Claimant’s Position
Court’s Position
Timing of DNA testing
Claimant’s Position
The claimant sought a DNA test at the outset of the paternity and property dispute.
Court’s Position
The court said he must first attempt to prove the alleged relationship through evidence before seeking scientific testing.
Basis for ordering the test
Claimant’s Position
The claimant relied on his assertion that he was B’s biological son, despite the defendants’ denial.
Court’s Position
The court held that an assertion and denial alone do not justify ordering a DNA test and that testing should not be routine.
- Court
- Bombay High Court
- Judge
- Justice Sandeep Marne
- Challenged order
- A 2018 Nashik civil court order directing DNA testing
- Claim
- A claimed to be the biological son of late B
- Property share sought
- One-fifth of B’s properties
- Court’s direction
- Evidence must be presented before a DNA test is considered
- Further application
- A may seek DNA testing after evidence if scientific evidence becomes necessary